The Clock Tower atop Watts Chapel
I find myself having to update my CV and résumés, now that the institution from which I earned both my M.Div. and Th.M. degrees has changed its name. What was once Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, having federated with the Presbyterian School of Christian Education and temporarily dubbed itself Union-PSCE, will henceforth be known as Union Presbyterian Seminary.
Like many alumni, I suspect, my verdict on the new name is still pending. I’m not a Presbyterian (with a big ‘P’, that is, as it’s rather hard to categorically oppose the office of the presbyter!), but I did choose Union for my initial theological education because I was attracted to the liberal Reformed tradition vis-à-vis Schleiermacher. So I find it helpful that President Brian Blount recently delivered a sermon that dealt with the name change, in which he defends the inclusion of “Presbyterian” thusly:
If we are as ecumenical as we have always claimed we are, here is our chance to live what we say by not running from our name but by reinvigorating what our name stands for. By how we train church leaders who are not just Presbyterian, but mostly so, by how we call faculty who are from the broad spectrum of the church, which we already do, by sending our graduates out with the knowledge of what God is doing in the world through a Reformed lens that has always been open to and engaging of other Christian perspectives, we can teach church leaders who can teach the church and the world what it has meant, does mean, and will mean to be Presbyterian. There are many in the world who don’t know. And those who do know see a church, or at least a seminary, running away from its own legacy as it apparently runs out of time. If the educational flagships of this faith armada abandon the name and therefore abandon the churches who still bear that name, then it is a time to fear for the Presbyterian church indeed.
The Union Presbyterian Seminary Quad
It seems we’re at a juncture in which each denomination is frightened of what appears to be a potential lack of a future. Anglicans, of course, are—to use the poetry of Charles Wesley – “sore oppressed with schisms rent asunder.” In the midst of its consideration of multiple restructuring proposals, the United Methodist Church finds its members asking “Why I remain a United Methodist,” under the assumption that its future is suspect. (The UM blogosphere has had a field trip on this question, which began here. Subsequent posts are too numerous to hyperlink…just google it if you’re interested.) At the juncture of these three traditions in my theological education, I too wonder what the future holds. We fear the annihilation of our traditions but we hold fast to hope in resurrection.
Similarly, President Blount:
I’ve always wanted to have Bible stuff happen to me. But the truth be told, I’ve only wanted the good stuff in the Bible to happen to me. I dread the leprosy, but I covet Jesus’ touch. I shudder at the blindness, but I glory in the suddenness of new sight. I tremble at the portraits of biblical poverty, but I long for the wealth of God’s presence walking and talking all over my countryside. I want the miracles, but I don’t want the desperate, painful, dangerous world the miracles must engage.
And that makes me think of what God can do in our world, with our name, with even “Presbyterian.” I think of Jeremiah in the 32nd chapter of his book, going to buy a field in Anathoth, a land under siege, destined to be destroyed. But his purchase was a sign of God’s faithfulness, and a sign of his participation with God in the new thing that was going to happen to this old and dying land. His purchase was a sign to his people of his trust that God was going to bring this land and this people back.
I like the first paragraph. And yet the second paragraph doesn’t quite follow. He assumes that it’s the name, “Union Theological Seminary and the Presbyterian School of Christian Education,” that is to be destroyed, but the thing itself, the “land under siege,” is what will be resurrected. But couldn’t the name “Presbyterian” be the thing destined to be destroyed? That seems to be the larger fear underlying many in the church today, that “Methodism” or “Anglicanism” or “Presbyterianism” is teetering on bankruptcy.
But perhaps—and I emphasize perhaps – God has something greater in store for all of us. Don’t get me wrong…I believe that the current ecumenical climate demands that we all emphasize the particularities of our traditions rather than whitewashing them with gross generalizations and universalist hogwash. But that doesn’t mean maintaining the status quo. As I’ve stated frequently here, I long for the day when Methodists are an order within the larger Anglican Communion or perhaps even the Roman Catholic Church, like the Benedictines or Dominicans or Jesuits, etc. But I digress.
At this point I’m fine with changing all my résumés to say “Presbyterian” (though I will include “formerly Union Theological Seminary in Virginia” when space permits!). I’m just nervous that all the crisis talk in our denominations hides the fact that we really should be looking elsewhere than inwardly. Then again, that would be all too characteristic of liberal Reformed theology vis-à-vis Schleiermacher.
Last night I had the pleasure of attending a “Composer’s Forum” with Krzysztof Penderecki at the U of T’s Faculty of Music.
